{"id":212283,"date":"2019-03-19T13:15:33","date_gmt":"2019-03-19T07:45:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=212283"},"modified":"2019-03-26T12:15:36","modified_gmt":"2019-03-26T06:45:36","slug":"bom-hc-dominant-user-of-construction-in-question-to-be-seen-while-considering-application-of-section-65-2-b-of-finance-act-1994","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/19\/bom-hc-dominant-user-of-construction-in-question-to-be-seen-while-considering-application-of-section-65-2-b-of-finance-act-1994\/","title":{"rendered":"Bom HC | ‘Dominant user’ of construction in question to be seen while considering application of Section 65 (2-b) of Finance Act, 1994"},"content":{"rendered":"

Bombay High Court:\u00a0<\/strong>S.C. Dharamadhikari and M.S. Karnik, JJ., dismissed an appeal filed against the order passed by Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (West Zone Bench) whereby it had allowed the respondent’s appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax confirming the demand of service tax of Rs 10,21,11,359.<\/p>\n

The respondent had provided services for construction and upgradation of facilities at Shiv Chatrapati Sports Complex, Pune. According to the appellant, the services were covered under the category of “commercial or industrial services”\u00a0<\/em>defined under Section 65 (20 b) of the Finance Act, 1994 (prior to amendment vide Act 14 of 2010) as the said stadium was used for commercial purposes. A demand for payment of service tax was raised on the respondent but no payment was made. Representations were exchanged, and by order dated 15-9-2011, the demand of service tax was confirmed. As against this, the respondent approached CESTAT and the said order dated 15-9-2011 was set aside. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant filed the present appeal.<\/p>\n

It was not even the case of the appellant that the stadium was exclusively used for commercial purpose. The relevant agreement\u00a0itself permitted the Committee to use 1\/3rd of the total area for commercial purpose. The question before the High Court was whether the user of stadium area\u00a0to the extent of 1\/3rd of the total area for a commercial purpose would tantamount to “commercial or industrial\u00a0construction service”?<\/em><\/p>\n

Perusing Section 65 (25-b), the Court observed, “The language employed in the definition clause is clear and unambiguous. The plain meaning as can be understood from the definition clause, more particularly, the clarification contained in clauses (i), (ii), (iii) is that the construction ipso facto is not leviable to service tax, but it is only when it is used, or to be used, primarily for “commerce” or “industry” or work intended for “commerce” or “industry” that service tax can be levied. Thus, it is only that construction which is to be used or primarily to be used for commerce that is subject to levy of service tax.”<\/strong><\/p>\n

Finding that in the present case, the dominant user of the stadium was non-commercial, the Court held that no service tax was attracted. Therefore, upholding the impugned order, the court dismissed the present appeals. [CCE v. B.J. Shirke Construction Technology (P) Ltd., 2019 SCC OnLine Bom 477<\/b><\/a>, decided on 15-03-2019]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Bombay High Court:\u00a0S.C. Dharamadhikari and M.S. Karnik, JJ., dismissed an appeal filed against the order passed by Central Excise and Service Tax <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":74381,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[6651,34484,34482,34483,7171,3208],"class_list":["post-212283","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-cestat","tag-commerce","tag-dominant-user","tag-finance-act-1994","tag-industry","tag-service_tax"],"yoast_head":"\nBom HC | 'Dominant user' of construction in question to be seen while considering application of Section 65 (2-b) of Finance Act, 1994 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/19\/bom-hc-dominant-user-of-construction-in-question-to-be-seen-while-considering-application-of-section-65-2-b-of-finance-act-1994\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bom HC | 'Dominant user' of construction in question to be seen while considering application of Section 65 (2-b) of Finance Act, 1994\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Bombay High Court:\u00a0S.C. Dharamadhikari and M.S. Karnik, JJ., dismissed an appeal filed against the order passed by Central Excise and Service Tax\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/19\/bom-hc-dominant-user-of-construction-in-question-to-be-seen-while-considering-application-of-section-65-2-b-of-finance-act-1994\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2019-03-19T07:45:33+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-03-26T06:45:36+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1331\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/19\/bom-hc-dominant-user-of-construction-in-question-to-be-seen-while-considering-application-of-section-65-2-b-of-finance-act-1994\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/19\/bom-hc-dominant-user-of-construction-in-question-to-be-seen-while-considering-application-of-section-65-2-b-of-finance-act-1994\/\",\"name\":\"Bom HC | 'Dominant user' of construction in question to be seen while considering application of Section 65 (2-b) of Finance Act, 1994 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/19\/bom-hc-dominant-user-of-construction-in-question-to-be-seen-while-considering-application-of-section-65-2-b-of-finance-act-1994\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/19\/bom-hc-dominant-user-of-construction-in-question-to-be-seen-while-considering-application-of-section-65-2-b-of-finance-act-1994\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2019-03-19T07:45:33+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-26T06:45:36+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/19\/bom-hc-dominant-user-of-construction-in-question-to-be-seen-while-considering-application-of-section-65-2-b-of-finance-act-1994\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/19\/bom-hc-dominant-user-of-construction-in-question-to-be-seen-while-considering-application-of-section-65-2-b-of-finance-act-1994\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/19\/bom-hc-dominant-user-of-construction-in-question-to-be-seen-while-considering-application-of-section-65-2-b-of-finance-act-1994\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"width\":1331,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/19\/bom-hc-dominant-user-of-construction-in-question-to-be-seen-while-considering-application-of-section-65-2-b-of-finance-act-1994\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bom HC | ‘Dominant user’ of construction in question to be seen while considering application of Section 65 (2-b) of Finance Act, 1994\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Bom HC | 'Dominant user' of construction in question to be seen while considering application of Section 65 (2-b) of Finance Act, 1994 | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/19\/bom-hc-dominant-user-of-construction-in-question-to-be-seen-while-considering-application-of-section-65-2-b-of-finance-act-1994\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bom HC | 'Dominant user' of construction in question to be seen while considering application of Section 65 (2-b) of Finance Act, 1994","og_description":"Bombay High Court:\u00a0S.C. Dharamadhikari and M.S. Karnik, JJ., dismissed an appeal filed against the order passed by Central Excise and Service Tax","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/19\/bom-hc-dominant-user-of-construction-in-question-to-be-seen-while-considering-application-of-section-65-2-b-of-finance-act-1994\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2019-03-19T07:45:33+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-03-26T06:45:36+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1331,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/19\/bom-hc-dominant-user-of-construction-in-question-to-be-seen-while-considering-application-of-section-65-2-b-of-finance-act-1994\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/19\/bom-hc-dominant-user-of-construction-in-question-to-be-seen-while-considering-application-of-section-65-2-b-of-finance-act-1994\/","name":"Bom HC | 'Dominant user' of construction in question to be seen while considering application of Section 65 (2-b) of Finance Act, 1994 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/19\/bom-hc-dominant-user-of-construction-in-question-to-be-seen-while-considering-application-of-section-65-2-b-of-finance-act-1994\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/19\/bom-hc-dominant-user-of-construction-in-question-to-be-seen-while-considering-application-of-section-65-2-b-of-finance-act-1994\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","datePublished":"2019-03-19T07:45:33+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-26T06:45:36+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/19\/bom-hc-dominant-user-of-construction-in-question-to-be-seen-while-considering-application-of-section-65-2-b-of-finance-act-1994\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/19\/bom-hc-dominant-user-of-construction-in-question-to-be-seen-while-considering-application-of-section-65-2-b-of-finance-act-1994\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/19\/bom-hc-dominant-user-of-construction-in-question-to-be-seen-while-considering-application-of-section-65-2-b-of-finance-act-1994\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","width":1331,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/19\/bom-hc-dominant-user-of-construction-in-question-to-be-seen-while-considering-application-of-section-65-2-b-of-finance-act-1994\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bom HC | ‘Dominant user’ of construction in question to be seen while considering application of Section 65 (2-b) of Finance Act, 1994"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":363302,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/10\/transferring-tenancy-rights-not-liable-to-service-tax-cestat\/","url_meta":{"origin":212283,"position":0},"title":"Transferring tenancy and occupancy rights in immovable property not service under S. 65-B(44) of Finance Act; not liable to service tax: CESTAT","author":"Bharti","date":"October 10, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\"Consideration out of surrender of tenancy right on account of immovable property cannot be considered as service as per definition under Section 65-B(44) of the Finance Act, 1994 and no service tax is payable.\"","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"transferring tenancy rights not liable to service tax","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/transferring-tenancy-rights-not-liable-to-service-tax.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/transferring-tenancy-rights-not-liable-to-service-tax.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/transferring-tenancy-rights-not-liable-to-service-tax.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/transferring-tenancy-rights-not-liable-to-service-tax.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":354006,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/21\/cestat-no-service-tax-on-upfront-fee-penalty-on-dmrc-set-aside\/","url_meta":{"origin":212283,"position":1},"title":"\u2018No service tax to be paid on upfront fee\/premium for agreement to lease\u2019; CESTAT sets aside penalty on DMRC","author":"Sanket","date":"July 21, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cAt the time of executing the Concession Agreements with developers, DMRC had collected \"upfront fee\" as a price for obtaining the respective Concession Agreements.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"service tax on upfront fee","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/service-tax-on-upfront-fee.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/service-tax-on-upfront-fee.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/service-tax-on-upfront-fee.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/service-tax-on-upfront-fee.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":355919,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/07\/cestat-service-tax-on-assignment-of-film-copyright-under-copyright-service\/","url_meta":{"origin":212283,"position":2},"title":"Whether service tax can be levied on transfer or assignment of copyright of the film produced under copyright service? CESTAT answers","author":"Bharti","date":"August 7, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The Adjudication Authority stated that the appellant\u2019s activity of receiving income from transferring temporarily or permitting the use of the right vested in the film produced by them to their clients fell under the definition of copyright service under Section 65(105)(zzzt) of the Finance Act, 1994.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Service tax on assignment under copyright service","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Service-tax-on-assignment-under-copyright-service.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Service-tax-on-assignment-under-copyright-service.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Service-tax-on-assignment-under-copyright-service.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Service-tax-on-assignment-under-copyright-service.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":366083,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/08\/no-service-tax-on-use-of-trade-marks-not-registered-in-india-cestat\/","url_meta":{"origin":212283,"position":3},"title":"Service tax not payable on use of trade marks not registered under Indian law: CESTAT","author":"Bharti","date":"November 8, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Intellectual property not registered in India do not constitute \u2018intellectual property rights\u2019 within the meaning of Section 65(55a) of the Finance Act, 1994 and the related services are not 'intellectual property services' within the meaning of Section 65 (55b) of the Finance Act, 1954.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"service tax on use of trade marks","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/service-tax-on-use-of-trade-marks.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/service-tax-on-use-of-trade-marks.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/service-tax-on-use-of-trade-marks.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/service-tax-on-use-of-trade-marks.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":368913,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/12\/05\/no-service-tax-on-construction-of-railway-siding-for-psus\/","url_meta":{"origin":212283,"position":4},"title":"Service Tax not leviable on construction of railway siding for Public Sector Undertaking\/Corporations: CESTAT","author":"Bharti","date":"December 5, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cUse of public does not necessarily mean by individual public but also includes use by Public Sector Undertaking\/ Corporations\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Service tax on construction of railway siding","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Service-tax-on-construction-of-railway-siding.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Service-tax-on-construction-of-railway-siding.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Service-tax-on-construction-of-railway-siding.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Service-tax-on-construction-of-railway-siding.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":269994,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/13\/service-rendered-by-consulting-engineer-prior-to-2005-amendment-to-finance-act-liable-to-service-tax-body-corporate-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":212283,"position":5},"title":"Explained| Can services rendered by a \u201cConsulting Engineer\u201d prior to 2005 Amendment to the Finance Act be subjected to service tax?","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"July 13, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court settled the issue of whether \u201cbody corporate\u201d is excluded from the definition of \u201cconsulting engineer\u201d under Section 65(31) of the Finance Act, 1994 prior to the amendment in 2005.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-22.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-22.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-22.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-22.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-22.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/212283","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=212283"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/212283\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/74381"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=212283"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=212283"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=212283"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}